By S R Ramanujan
More than any political party, the Indian National Congress seems to be upset the most and is in jitters over the Varun episode. There are reasons for it. The entire galaxy of Congress leaders have been unsuccessfully trying their best to catapult the heir apparent of the Nehru dynasty, Rahul Gandhi, to a political slot which would automatically make him eligible to sustain the dynasty. And that was not happening. What is more, the ruling Gandhi appears to be a reluctant politician a la his father before he took the final plunge under pressure.
But here is a dissident Gandhi who was appropriated by the Bharatiya Janata Party, the grand old party’s arch rival, who is set to score a point or two against the ruling dynasty and he had made waves politically even before he could take the first step in electoral politics. How can the Congress digest it? He must be driven out of politics so that the BJP cannot claim a scion of Nehru family in its fold. Is it not something blasphemous that someone from the Nehru dynasty could embrace “communal” forces?
So, the Congress wanted to disqualify him by making an edited CD of his speech in Philibit available in public domain. In fact, it boomeranged on the party. While it did not want another Gandhi emerge in the political firmament of the country to challenge the official Gandhi what happened was the exact opposite. Had the Congress ignored it and did not go to the Election Commission with a petition, media would have made some noise a for a day or two and zeroed in on some other story for its daily sensational fare.
Interestingly, so far nobody had access to the text of Varun’s speech in any of those rallies in Philibhit. So far, there is no history of the judicial forums relying on edited version of anything, much less a tape. It is still a mystery as to how this edited CD landed in media houses. Whoever did it, it was a God-sent for the secular media to telecast the tape in all its bulletins for nearly a fortnight and demonstrate its secular credentials. Having prepared the secular mindset in the country with media blitzkrieg, the Congress petitioned the Election Commission which found Varun guilty of violation of model code of conduct.
FIR was filed under IPC and Peoples Representation Act and the Allahabad High Court refused to quash the FIR. Delhi High Court gave Varun only an interim bail which expired on 27th March. What were the options open to Varun? Either he should abscond himself or surrender before the Law enforcement authorities. He chose the second option. What did the media say? It was dubbed “Arrest Drama”. When he surrendered in due deference to the law of the land, it was a drama, because politically it was not advantageous to his opponents. Had he not surrendered, he would have been castigated for ignoring the law of the land and a verdict would have been delivered by the media that Varun was a law unto himself. When the media and seculars accused him of “communal and divisive politics” based on his speech, the media, to be fair and objective, should have hailed him for his act of surrender instead of running him down.
Both the media and the “secular” parties knew that Varun’s act of surrender had only furthered his political image, especially in view the spontaneous crowd that gathered at Philibit on 28th March. I am saying “spontaneous” because there was no time either for the BJP or the candidate to mobilise such a crowd. The presence of emotionally charged crowd in such numbers much to the consternation of everyone, sent a clear message to the opponents of the BJP. Varun had become a hero without much effort thanks to the hyperactive media. What many Sangh leaders could not achieve after years of struggle, Varun achieved in a jiffy. That is the reason the Congress tried to divert the attention from Varun to the BJP and particularly Advani. When Advani did not comment immediately on the events in Philibit, the party’s spokespersons said his silence itself reveals his “nod” for the “arrest drama” and that he was in tune with what is happening. When Advani backed Varun in a media meet, it was “we-told-you-so” tone and tenor.
When the Congress was trying to put the blame on Advani for the whole turn of events saying that Varun was only a pawn in BJP’s game, Mayawati became a spoilsport. She booked Varun under National Security Act and brought the focus again on Varun. She had a limited objective. Varun should not be available for the BJP during the poll campaign. NSA may render him to be behind the bars for a year without bail. Since Varun has become a red rag for the so-called secular brigade and as his campaign not only in Philibit but throughout Uttar Pradesh might change the shifting fortunes of the BJP, Behenji wants him to be safely ensconced in a jail. It suits every one – the Congress, the Samajwadi party and the Bahujan Samaj party. But is it going to be so simple. Whenever the establishment took to such short cuts, people’s mood has always been against the establishment.
If Varun can be accused of indulging in “divisive politics”, what is the record of Mulayam Singh or Mayawati? By charging Varun under NSA, Mayawati is having an eye on 17% of the Muslim votes in the state on which Mulayam claims proprietory control. If someone wants to mobilise Hindu votes, he is “divisive” and “communal”. If somebody else tries to consolidate Muslim votes, he is secular. This is the definition of the so-called secularism in this country.
What did Varun do to attract NSA? He went to Philibit court to surrender and he did not give a call for people to protest in front of the court or the jail. It was a spontaneous upsurge because he was espousing a cause that appealed to a major section of the electorate, the proof of which was in the turnout. It is a different matter that it was not palatable to the “seculars” and for the secular media, it was “mobocracy” and not democracy. When Sanjay Dutt arrived in Lucknow to a tumultuous welcome from fans in thousands, it was democracy and not mobocracy.
Many political parties and leaders had led protest marches in the past and there were violent incidents. When Praja Rajyam Party leader Chiranjeevi conducted roadshows, quite a few died because of stampede and the Andhra Pradesh High court had to intervene and impose a ban on road shows. He was not booked for attempt to murder. There were many political rallies in the past in which people were lathi-charged and injured and public properties were damaged. No politician was booked under NSA. We must ask Trinamool leader Mamta Banerjee and an ally in the UPA, as to what sort of hardship she might have caused to the public during her dharnas in West Bengal.
To be fair to Behenji, she did not discriminate between the Congress and the BJP. She cancelled the rally of UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi months back in her constituency and imposed section 144. Sonia did defy the section 144 and there was no case against her. But Varun is different, you see. Sonia can get just two seats in UP which are almost her fiefdom. Varun is all set to set the Gangetic plain on fire as the new found icon of BJP. How can Mayawati or the Congress allow him to get away with that?
Monday, March 30, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
RATS JUMPING OUT OF SINKING SHIP
By S R Ramanujan
With Mrs Sonia Gandhi making a categorical statement that Dr Manmohan Singh is the Prime Ministerial candidate of the Congress party, there can be relief for the concerned citizens of this country. Not because the short interval in the dynastic rule will continue for another term, assuming that the UPA will manage numbers, but there will be level playing field among the Prime Ministerial candidates of the two major political formations. In fact, that is what the Election Commission also wants, I mean, level playing field. Soon after American Presidential polls, a comparison was sought to be made between the young and energetic Obama and Octogenarian Advani and the latter was equated with John McCain, Republican candidate who lost the elections. Now, with Manmohan Singh in the Prime Ministerial fray, who is not much younger to Advani any way, those who wanted to hold Advani’s age against him have been silenced. Advani doesn’t have to demonstrate any longer his physical prowess by posing for the photographers in a gym.
While Advani, despite his age, seems to be enjoying robust health, the same cannot be said of the Sardar who has just begun to attend office after the second bypass surgery and an angioplasty. As he himself admitted in his recent press conference he may not be able to take the rigours of a massive poll campaign throughout the length and breadth of the country comprising of an electorate of 710 million voters. In a way Advani may be better placed in terms of physical agility, leave alone his political strength or weakness.
Interestingly, the Congress President is yet to announce from where the Prime Ministerial candidate of the party would contest the elections and whether he would contest at all. A strong Prime Minister, as he claims himself to be one, and as one who is reported to have done a lot to the country in comparison to the NDA’s Prime Ministerial candidate, he should be able to contest the elections to the Lok Sabha from anywhere in the country instead of taking the Rajya Sabha route. Throughout his five-year term, he was only a Rajya Sabha member. Should we have a nominated Prime Minister once again?
Sonia Gandhi also said that Manmohan Singh alone can provide stability. Succumbing to the Left pressure for four-and-a-half years in the name of common minimum programme and diluting his own cherished economic reforms is what can be considered stability, yes, he provided stability. The only issue on which Singh showed that he has spine was the Indo-US nuclear deal. But that almost destabilised the government and the greatest wheeler dealer of Indian politics, Amar Singh, a Bollywood buddy, had to come to the rescue of his government by all foul means. Now, even he has started blackmailing the Congress and has almost deserted the party.
ManmohanSingh says that Advani presided over the Gujrat riots and that his greatest achievement was Babri demolition. Poor Sardar ignores his own backyard. Whose contribution was desecration of Golden Temple and demolition of Akal Takt. Who presided over the massacre of Sikhs in Delhi? Is it not his party and leader? Who presided over 26/11 and series of terror attacks throughout the UPA tenure which killed hundreds of people?
Even giving allowance for parties’ penchant for posturing during the thick of polls, UPA’s claim of its strength does not seem to be based on ground realities. Its allies in UP, Bihar and Jharkand (RJD, LJP and fly by night ally SP) have deserted the Congress even as claiming to be part of the UPA. While the Congress lost UP, Bihar and Jharkand even before the nomination process, there is a move by Samajwadi Party, Rashtriya Janata Dal and Lok Janashakti Party to come together as a Front, well you may call it Fourth Front, and the result would be complete demolition of the grand old party. These three states put together have 134 seats.
The latest jolt to the Congress comes from Tamil Nadu where the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) has preferred to sail with AIADMK. One does not know with whom the AIADMK will sail after the elections. But at the moment, so long as Congress is with the DMK, there is no possibility of Jayalalithaa breaking bread with Congress since Jaya’s only target is Karunanidhi’s barren scalp. If the DMK fares badly on May 16 and UPA has no use for the party and is prepared to alienate it, one need not be surprised if Jaya goes with the UPA. That is the reason Dr Anbumani Ramadoss is keeping a door open when he says that he continues to have cordial relations with Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh.
Sharad Pawar in Maharashtra is making no bones of his Prime Ministerial ambition on and off despite the seat sharing arrangement between NCP and Congress. One day he says Third Front cannot be wished away as of no consequence. Another day he says that UPA cannot form government without Left support. He knows full well that the Left will not support the UPA if Manmohan Singh gets a second term as PM. In such a case, his hint is quite obvious. In case Left support becomes inevitable to keep the “communal” forces at bay, UPA has to look for an alternative candidate. Who is that alternative candidate? Pawar thinks that he will be the best choice. Will Mulayam and Lalu pave the way for Pawar? Certainly not. They themselves are the aspirants. In fact, RJD cadre wants to see Lalu as the Prime Minister. It is quite amusing to note that even as Pawar was playing this “secular” game with the Left and demonstrates his love for the reds, his party leader and former Speaker of the Lok Sabha, P A Sangma who is upset with the Congress for the President’s Rule in Meghalaya, says he would be campaigning for the BJP in the North-east. So much for the unity within.
Now, the only allies of 2004 left with the UPA are NCP and DMK. But the moot point is whether the NCP will continue with the UPA after the polls if the latter fails to get the required numbers. Another ally is a new found one in West Bengal and that is Trinamool Congress besides National Conference in Jammu and Kashmir. No one can hazard a guess as to which way Mamata will go after the polls.
By any reckoning, it appears the Conngress is almost isolated and the UPA is no longer a well-knit entity. A basic question that arises is this. If the allies like RJD, LJP, JMM, PMK and SP are confident that the UPA can get the magic number, will they behave in a manner they did with the party that claims that it alone can provide stability and that its leader alone is strong? To use a cliché, the rats are jumping out of the sinking ship.
With Mrs Sonia Gandhi making a categorical statement that Dr Manmohan Singh is the Prime Ministerial candidate of the Congress party, there can be relief for the concerned citizens of this country. Not because the short interval in the dynastic rule will continue for another term, assuming that the UPA will manage numbers, but there will be level playing field among the Prime Ministerial candidates of the two major political formations. In fact, that is what the Election Commission also wants, I mean, level playing field. Soon after American Presidential polls, a comparison was sought to be made between the young and energetic Obama and Octogenarian Advani and the latter was equated with John McCain, Republican candidate who lost the elections. Now, with Manmohan Singh in the Prime Ministerial fray, who is not much younger to Advani any way, those who wanted to hold Advani’s age against him have been silenced. Advani doesn’t have to demonstrate any longer his physical prowess by posing for the photographers in a gym.
While Advani, despite his age, seems to be enjoying robust health, the same cannot be said of the Sardar who has just begun to attend office after the second bypass surgery and an angioplasty. As he himself admitted in his recent press conference he may not be able to take the rigours of a massive poll campaign throughout the length and breadth of the country comprising of an electorate of 710 million voters. In a way Advani may be better placed in terms of physical agility, leave alone his political strength or weakness.
Interestingly, the Congress President is yet to announce from where the Prime Ministerial candidate of the party would contest the elections and whether he would contest at all. A strong Prime Minister, as he claims himself to be one, and as one who is reported to have done a lot to the country in comparison to the NDA’s Prime Ministerial candidate, he should be able to contest the elections to the Lok Sabha from anywhere in the country instead of taking the Rajya Sabha route. Throughout his five-year term, he was only a Rajya Sabha member. Should we have a nominated Prime Minister once again?
Sonia Gandhi also said that Manmohan Singh alone can provide stability. Succumbing to the Left pressure for four-and-a-half years in the name of common minimum programme and diluting his own cherished economic reforms is what can be considered stability, yes, he provided stability. The only issue on which Singh showed that he has spine was the Indo-US nuclear deal. But that almost destabilised the government and the greatest wheeler dealer of Indian politics, Amar Singh, a Bollywood buddy, had to come to the rescue of his government by all foul means. Now, even he has started blackmailing the Congress and has almost deserted the party.
ManmohanSingh says that Advani presided over the Gujrat riots and that his greatest achievement was Babri demolition. Poor Sardar ignores his own backyard. Whose contribution was desecration of Golden Temple and demolition of Akal Takt. Who presided over the massacre of Sikhs in Delhi? Is it not his party and leader? Who presided over 26/11 and series of terror attacks throughout the UPA tenure which killed hundreds of people?
Even giving allowance for parties’ penchant for posturing during the thick of polls, UPA’s claim of its strength does not seem to be based on ground realities. Its allies in UP, Bihar and Jharkand (RJD, LJP and fly by night ally SP) have deserted the Congress even as claiming to be part of the UPA. While the Congress lost UP, Bihar and Jharkand even before the nomination process, there is a move by Samajwadi Party, Rashtriya Janata Dal and Lok Janashakti Party to come together as a Front, well you may call it Fourth Front, and the result would be complete demolition of the grand old party. These three states put together have 134 seats.
The latest jolt to the Congress comes from Tamil Nadu where the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) has preferred to sail with AIADMK. One does not know with whom the AIADMK will sail after the elections. But at the moment, so long as Congress is with the DMK, there is no possibility of Jayalalithaa breaking bread with Congress since Jaya’s only target is Karunanidhi’s barren scalp. If the DMK fares badly on May 16 and UPA has no use for the party and is prepared to alienate it, one need not be surprised if Jaya goes with the UPA. That is the reason Dr Anbumani Ramadoss is keeping a door open when he says that he continues to have cordial relations with Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh.
Sharad Pawar in Maharashtra is making no bones of his Prime Ministerial ambition on and off despite the seat sharing arrangement between NCP and Congress. One day he says Third Front cannot be wished away as of no consequence. Another day he says that UPA cannot form government without Left support. He knows full well that the Left will not support the UPA if Manmohan Singh gets a second term as PM. In such a case, his hint is quite obvious. In case Left support becomes inevitable to keep the “communal” forces at bay, UPA has to look for an alternative candidate. Who is that alternative candidate? Pawar thinks that he will be the best choice. Will Mulayam and Lalu pave the way for Pawar? Certainly not. They themselves are the aspirants. In fact, RJD cadre wants to see Lalu as the Prime Minister. It is quite amusing to note that even as Pawar was playing this “secular” game with the Left and demonstrates his love for the reds, his party leader and former Speaker of the Lok Sabha, P A Sangma who is upset with the Congress for the President’s Rule in Meghalaya, says he would be campaigning for the BJP in the North-east. So much for the unity within.
Now, the only allies of 2004 left with the UPA are NCP and DMK. But the moot point is whether the NCP will continue with the UPA after the polls if the latter fails to get the required numbers. Another ally is a new found one in West Bengal and that is Trinamool Congress besides National Conference in Jammu and Kashmir. No one can hazard a guess as to which way Mamata will go after the polls.
By any reckoning, it appears the Conngress is almost isolated and the UPA is no longer a well-knit entity. A basic question that arises is this. If the allies like RJD, LJP, JMM, PMK and SP are confident that the UPA can get the magic number, will they behave in a manner they did with the party that claims that it alone can provide stability and that its leader alone is strong? To use a cliché, the rats are jumping out of the sinking ship.
Monday, March 23, 2009
There seems to be some justification for Varun Gandhi's grouse against the Election Commission. The basic question is who shot the "hate speech" CD? Who delivered it to the channels? How did it land in the office of the Congress party which submitted it to the EC? Varun says that in the CD that was with the EC, there is the logo of a channel. He did not name the channel. Obviously, the EC cannot act on what appears in print or in the channels. Varun is quite right when he says he should have been given a fair chance to represent himself in person or through his lawyer to make depositions before the Commission. EC, for sure, did not apply principles of natural justice.
As of today, Varun is only an Indian citizen like you and me and not an official candidate of any party or is he an independent candidate. What jurisdiction the EC has on an ordinary citizen for inflammatory speech. It is for the law enforcement officials to take cognisance of any objectionable act committed by the citizens and not the EC. Why did the EC keep quiet when Samajwadi party declared that it was fielding Sanajay Dutt, convicted under TADA for more heinous and anti-national crime of colluding with those who waged a war against the nation? How come the EC did not advise Mulayam Singh Yadav not to field Dutt from Lucknow? That is where the EC's slip shows and shows very badly.
As of today, Varun is only an Indian citizen like you and me and not an official candidate of any party or is he an independent candidate. What jurisdiction the EC has on an ordinary citizen for inflammatory speech. It is for the law enforcement officials to take cognisance of any objectionable act committed by the citizens and not the EC. Why did the EC keep quiet when Samajwadi party declared that it was fielding Sanajay Dutt, convicted under TADA for more heinous and anti-national crime of colluding with those who waged a war against the nation? How come the EC did not advise Mulayam Singh Yadav not to field Dutt from Lucknow? That is where the EC's slip shows and shows very badly.
Friday, March 20, 2009
MEDIA COMMUNALISM
MEDIA COMMUNALISM
By S R Ramanujan
_________________________________________________________________________
In one of his responses to media “interrogation”, Jawaharlal Nehru’s great grandson and a political debutant Varun Gandhi said that he was being targeted simply because he was a “Gandhi”. What he probably meant was that because he was an “estranged Gandhi”, he was on the firing line of his rivals, no prizes for the guess, and specially the English media. The speech that was attributed to him, doctored or otherwise, was certainly not in good taste. His defence that while his speech did not incite any single individual for nearly 15 days was by itself a pointer that there was no malice on his part may not wash either.
However, the role of media is certainly open to question. While reporting that it was a “hate speech” “blatantly communal” etc, did the media behave responsibly by telecasting the tape umpteen times a day for the last few days. If the media really believed that the speech was intended to or likely to cause unrest among a section of the people, do the repeat telecasts of the speech make any sense, or does it show the media as a responsible institution?
When the Election Commission sincerely believes that it was indeed a “hate speech” and might cause communal disturbances, it should have intervened and restrained the media from repeat telecast. Media did its job by reporting the event with the CD supplied to all channels by a mysterious source. Follow up stories need not always be with the same offensive CD. Finding an excuse to repeat the telecast of the CD does only expose the channels’ real intentions. May be, it helps those who charge the mainline channels of being anti-majority.
Though conventional ethics demands that the source need not be disclosed, on instances like this, where the CD is not the result of the efforts put in by the reporting staff, revealing the source might help viewers make up their mind as to the intentions of those behind the CD that is dished out to them atleast a dozen times a day irrespective of the genuineness of the CD especially when Varun is harbouring a conspiracy theory. This is analogous to the tendency of both print and electronic media decrying obscenity while printing and showing such obscene pictures without any restraint as an excuse to deal with the subject and in the process titillating the readers and viewers.
Varun Gandhi made certain observations relating to the context in which he made objectionable statements. He was citing the atrocities, real or imaginary, committed on the majority community in the border constituency of Pilibhit. Should not the media make its own independent investigation into the charges made by the fresher in politics rather than repeating the telecast of the same CD? Is the media afraid that it will not help its ultra secular image?
When National Conference leader Omar Abdullah made a speech during the Trust Vote in the Lok Sabha stating that he was proud to be a Muslim and an Indian, media was hunky dory over his speech and it was considered the best speech in recent times in Parliament. He was equivocal on Amarnath issue during the speech and his role during the Amarnath agitation is no secret to the citizens of this country. But the media did not think he was communal or practising divisive politics when he spoke for Muslims.
Take the case of Majlis-e-Ittehaadul Muslimeen (MIM). Everyone knows how rabidly communal the party is. Well, it is a different story that the MIM was an ally of the UPA in the last elections. Now, the party wants to have the veto power in the appointment of Police Commissioners or Director General of Police in Andhra Pradesh. MIM President Asaduddin Owaisi petitioned the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of AP against the inclusion of a particular officer in the panel for the top Police post stating that his “communal and high-handed was had alienated him from the Muslims of Andhra Pradesh”. So, the basic pre-condition for appointment to the top police post, it seems, is that he/she should enjoy the confidence of the minority community. If the majority community makes a similar demand, well, we know what would be the reaction of the media. The community or its leaders will attract instant criticism that they are divisive and communal. But the national media is silent over the MIM’s demand.
Abdul Nassar Madhani’s terror links and the Kerala CPI-M’s proximity to him is no news for the national media. Interestingly, while the chief minister betrays his helplessness on the issue stating that it takes time for him to get information from his intra-party rival and the state home minister, the latter feels there is no need for an enquiry into Madanis’ terror links. The party wants Madani’s PDP support to win elections. Never mind the fundamentalist nature of the PDP’s policies and programmes. For the freshers, Madani was the one who master-minded the Coimbatore blast in the nineties to assassinate L K Advani who, however, had a narrow escape.
The latest is Imran Kidwai’s Chandigarh speech. Though he made the “hate speech” on March 15 nearer to Delhi and not in the far off Pilibhit, and the BJP petitioned the EC on March 19 with the CD, which was circulated to the media by the party, the national media did not seem to have picked up the story. Imran Kidwai is a senior Congress leader and he said “I regret not being a mufti. Had I been one, I would have issued just one fatwa that going with the BJP amounts to committing kufr”. AICC in-charge for Punjab Moshina Kidwai and party candidate and Union Minister Pawan Banswal were reportedly present at the public meeting in which Imran is alleged to have made this statement. This seems to be a perfectly secular sermon for our media. Hence, the deafening silence?
In contrast, on the same day, Mallika Sarabhai’s decision to take on Advani in Gandhinagar was a great developing story for most of the national channels. There was a “live” debate with her in atleast two English channels. While the anchors conceded that there was “negligible” chance of her winning, and that her real intention may be to hog publicity, the debate, nevertheless, continued for quite some time. Of course, in all fairness to her, she maintained that her foray into electoral politics was not to score a point or two on secularism.
An interesting side-show for this secular-communal diatribe is the petition filed by the “Vaishnavites” of Andhra Pradesh before the CEO, Hyderabad, against the CPI-M state secretary B V Raghvulu who asked the state finance minister K Rosaiah to wear “namam” and roam the streets of Andhra Pradesh as a mendicant. Vaishnavites felt that their sentiments were hurt by Raghavulu’s statement as he ridiculed their sacred “namam”. For the uninitiated, what the Chief Election Commissioner Gopalaswamy wears on his forehead is “namam”. Even this story had no takers in the national media.
The lesson, therefore, is communalism, whether prefixed with the labels like “majority” or “ minority” need not be confined to men occupying political space in this country. Media cannot be far away from it.
By S R Ramanujan
_________________________________________________________________________
In one of his responses to media “interrogation”, Jawaharlal Nehru’s great grandson and a political debutant Varun Gandhi said that he was being targeted simply because he was a “Gandhi”. What he probably meant was that because he was an “estranged Gandhi”, he was on the firing line of his rivals, no prizes for the guess, and specially the English media. The speech that was attributed to him, doctored or otherwise, was certainly not in good taste. His defence that while his speech did not incite any single individual for nearly 15 days was by itself a pointer that there was no malice on his part may not wash either.
However, the role of media is certainly open to question. While reporting that it was a “hate speech” “blatantly communal” etc, did the media behave responsibly by telecasting the tape umpteen times a day for the last few days. If the media really believed that the speech was intended to or likely to cause unrest among a section of the people, do the repeat telecasts of the speech make any sense, or does it show the media as a responsible institution?
When the Election Commission sincerely believes that it was indeed a “hate speech” and might cause communal disturbances, it should have intervened and restrained the media from repeat telecast. Media did its job by reporting the event with the CD supplied to all channels by a mysterious source. Follow up stories need not always be with the same offensive CD. Finding an excuse to repeat the telecast of the CD does only expose the channels’ real intentions. May be, it helps those who charge the mainline channels of being anti-majority.
Though conventional ethics demands that the source need not be disclosed, on instances like this, where the CD is not the result of the efforts put in by the reporting staff, revealing the source might help viewers make up their mind as to the intentions of those behind the CD that is dished out to them atleast a dozen times a day irrespective of the genuineness of the CD especially when Varun is harbouring a conspiracy theory. This is analogous to the tendency of both print and electronic media decrying obscenity while printing and showing such obscene pictures without any restraint as an excuse to deal with the subject and in the process titillating the readers and viewers.
Varun Gandhi made certain observations relating to the context in which he made objectionable statements. He was citing the atrocities, real or imaginary, committed on the majority community in the border constituency of Pilibhit. Should not the media make its own independent investigation into the charges made by the fresher in politics rather than repeating the telecast of the same CD? Is the media afraid that it will not help its ultra secular image?
When National Conference leader Omar Abdullah made a speech during the Trust Vote in the Lok Sabha stating that he was proud to be a Muslim and an Indian, media was hunky dory over his speech and it was considered the best speech in recent times in Parliament. He was equivocal on Amarnath issue during the speech and his role during the Amarnath agitation is no secret to the citizens of this country. But the media did not think he was communal or practising divisive politics when he spoke for Muslims.
Take the case of Majlis-e-Ittehaadul Muslimeen (MIM). Everyone knows how rabidly communal the party is. Well, it is a different story that the MIM was an ally of the UPA in the last elections. Now, the party wants to have the veto power in the appointment of Police Commissioners or Director General of Police in Andhra Pradesh. MIM President Asaduddin Owaisi petitioned the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of AP against the inclusion of a particular officer in the panel for the top Police post stating that his “communal and high-handed was had alienated him from the Muslims of Andhra Pradesh”. So, the basic pre-condition for appointment to the top police post, it seems, is that he/she should enjoy the confidence of the minority community. If the majority community makes a similar demand, well, we know what would be the reaction of the media. The community or its leaders will attract instant criticism that they are divisive and communal. But the national media is silent over the MIM’s demand.
Abdul Nassar Madhani’s terror links and the Kerala CPI-M’s proximity to him is no news for the national media. Interestingly, while the chief minister betrays his helplessness on the issue stating that it takes time for him to get information from his intra-party rival and the state home minister, the latter feels there is no need for an enquiry into Madanis’ terror links. The party wants Madani’s PDP support to win elections. Never mind the fundamentalist nature of the PDP’s policies and programmes. For the freshers, Madani was the one who master-minded the Coimbatore blast in the nineties to assassinate L K Advani who, however, had a narrow escape.
The latest is Imran Kidwai’s Chandigarh speech. Though he made the “hate speech” on March 15 nearer to Delhi and not in the far off Pilibhit, and the BJP petitioned the EC on March 19 with the CD, which was circulated to the media by the party, the national media did not seem to have picked up the story. Imran Kidwai is a senior Congress leader and he said “I regret not being a mufti. Had I been one, I would have issued just one fatwa that going with the BJP amounts to committing kufr”. AICC in-charge for Punjab Moshina Kidwai and party candidate and Union Minister Pawan Banswal were reportedly present at the public meeting in which Imran is alleged to have made this statement. This seems to be a perfectly secular sermon for our media. Hence, the deafening silence?
In contrast, on the same day, Mallika Sarabhai’s decision to take on Advani in Gandhinagar was a great developing story for most of the national channels. There was a “live” debate with her in atleast two English channels. While the anchors conceded that there was “negligible” chance of her winning, and that her real intention may be to hog publicity, the debate, nevertheless, continued for quite some time. Of course, in all fairness to her, she maintained that her foray into electoral politics was not to score a point or two on secularism.
An interesting side-show for this secular-communal diatribe is the petition filed by the “Vaishnavites” of Andhra Pradesh before the CEO, Hyderabad, against the CPI-M state secretary B V Raghvulu who asked the state finance minister K Rosaiah to wear “namam” and roam the streets of Andhra Pradesh as a mendicant. Vaishnavites felt that their sentiments were hurt by Raghavulu’s statement as he ridiculed their sacred “namam”. For the uninitiated, what the Chief Election Commissioner Gopalaswamy wears on his forehead is “namam”. Even this story had no takers in the national media.
The lesson, therefore, is communalism, whether prefixed with the labels like “majority” or “ minority” need not be confined to men occupying political space in this country. Media cannot be far away from it.
Friday, March 13, 2009
PAWAR TO BE LEFT IN THE LURCH?
BE LEFT IN THE LURCH?
By S R Ramanujan
Maharashtra strongman and Nationalist Congress Party chief, Sharad Pawar, who sees Third Front as a force to reckon with, is all set to unleash the cat among the UPA pigeons. He is not going to be content with that. An unscrupulous politician that he is, Pawar is bent upon breaking the UPA, NDA and the latest edition of Third Front to realise his ambition. Whether he succeeds or not, he is going to make an effort to wean away Samajwadi Party from UPA, Shiv Sena from the NDA and whatever possible from the Third Front.
It is difficult to say whether Pawar’s party would be able to get atleast 20 Lok Sabha seats in the coming polls on its own, but never mind, it doesn’t stop his ambitions to the top post in the country. Everyone is entitled to his ambitions. But such ambition should be based on certain realities. A paraplegic cannot nurse an ambition to climb the Mount Everest. Well, one may say politics is all about immense possibilities. May be. Then, it cannot be divorced from ground realities and should not defy conventional wisdom, Costitutional dictum and political ethics. And sadly, Pawar wants to play the most dangerous parochial card. He says that the people of his state want a Maharashtrian Prime Minister. Is this not most abominable divisive politics? Why do we blame others of such a sin? Did he conduct his own survey to know the pulse of Maharashstrians? Look at the irony. His party calls itself as “nationalist” and he plays the worst possible regional card.
Let us look at the basics first. How do we elect a Prime Minister? We have a Parliamentary democracy and not Presidential democracy. A party that enjoys a majority in the House is entitled to elect its Prime Minister and such a candidate should enjoy the confidence of the MPs of his/her party. No one looks at his caste, religion or linguistic background. What is important is whether such a leader is capable enough to do justice to his post, never mind whichever state he hails from.
Pawar is trying to set a dangerous precedent by linking the post of chief executive of the country to his linguistic/regional background. If we extend this logic, why should we deny this privilege to Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal etc. Does this not open the flood gates for people of those states to make a similar demand? Will it not amount to a mockery of our Constitution? As it is, the regional parties are slowly making the national parties irrelevant which, certainly is not in the interest of the nation. Pawar is adding another dirty dimension to the country’s political ethos.
Whoever knows Pawar’s style of politics would vouch for his strange, mysterious and inscrutable political conduct. He can sup with the devil if it can serve his political purpose. If he is now playing the Marathi manoos card, one does not know whether it is just a ploy to wean away Shiv Sena from the BJP atleast after the polls. Shiv Sena, Pawar knows, is quite vulnerable and will become an easy prey for such parochial appeal. If it is not to upset the NDA alliance, he must have other political calculations to stitch up numbers.
Pawar has already declared his penchant for the Third Front and kept an option open in case he needs numbers. But how many from the Third Front will go with him is a moot question. He is going to be greatly disappointed if he counts on the Third Front to realise his ambitions. Besides the four Left parties, Third Front has TDP, TRS, JD(S) and an unknown party of Bhajan Lal and his son who may not get even a single seat. The major regional parties – BSP and AIADMK – are fence sitters till now. There are reports that Telengana Rashtra Samiti chief K Chandrasekara Rao might get out of the “Mahakutami” after the polls in case the NDA is able to pip the post since the latter has promised Telengana statehood within 100 days of coming to power. Interestingly, the Left is split in Kerala and the CPI-M’s big brother attitude has alienated the CPI and both the parties are likely to field candidates in all the 20 seats in Kerala. Revolutionary Socialist Party, one of the partners of the Front did not attend the meeting in Karnataka. So, within the Third Front, Left is in disarray and if the Left parties get 40 seats in the 15th Lok Sabha, they must thank Marx or Lenin.
Can Pawar depend on Mayawati? Certainly not. Mayawati, inspite of giving a miss to the launch function of the Front in Karnataka, has invited the Third Front members for a dinner on Sunday to find out whether they would declare her as the Front’s Prime Ministerial nominee. Probably, she wants this as a pre-condition to formally join the Third Front. All available indications are that the Front partners may oblige her as her party is likely to emerge as the single largest party after UPA and NDA. And for the Left, she will be a better bet as it will cut Amar Singh, a betrayer of the Left, to size. Further, the Left can take the credit for projecting a “Dalit beti” as the country’s first Prime Minister from the oppressed section of society. It will be a double whammy – a woman and a dalit! Most important of all, the Left can continue to exert influence at the Centre as it did for nearly four and a half years with the UPA and bark and bite whenever it likes.
This possible development is also likely to drive away the AIADMK supemo J Jayalalithaa, another aspirant for the top post, from the Front and we need not be surprised if she ties up with the NDA as UPA continues to harbour Karunanidhi despite his shrinking stock. Even her alliance with the Left in Tamil Nadu is an uneasy one and it may go bust anyday.
So, Pawar will be left with only Samajwadi Party which is the only party, so far, to have extended its support to the ambitions of NCP chief. But how many seats SP will have in its kitty to extend formidable support to Pawar? If UPA emerges stronger than what is was in 2004, a remote possibility of course, why should the SP desert the UPA and go behind Pawar? It makes no political sense.
Only two regional parties are left out in this exercise. They are the TDP and Biju Janata Dal. Both these parties are occupying anti-Congress space in their respective states and therefore, they cannot go with the UPA. They will have no alternative except to sail with the Third Front and strengthen the hands of Mayawati.
Where does this leave Pawar? In the lurch?
By S R Ramanujan
Maharashtra strongman and Nationalist Congress Party chief, Sharad Pawar, who sees Third Front as a force to reckon with, is all set to unleash the cat among the UPA pigeons. He is not going to be content with that. An unscrupulous politician that he is, Pawar is bent upon breaking the UPA, NDA and the latest edition of Third Front to realise his ambition. Whether he succeeds or not, he is going to make an effort to wean away Samajwadi Party from UPA, Shiv Sena from the NDA and whatever possible from the Third Front.
It is difficult to say whether Pawar’s party would be able to get atleast 20 Lok Sabha seats in the coming polls on its own, but never mind, it doesn’t stop his ambitions to the top post in the country. Everyone is entitled to his ambitions. But such ambition should be based on certain realities. A paraplegic cannot nurse an ambition to climb the Mount Everest. Well, one may say politics is all about immense possibilities. May be. Then, it cannot be divorced from ground realities and should not defy conventional wisdom, Costitutional dictum and political ethics. And sadly, Pawar wants to play the most dangerous parochial card. He says that the people of his state want a Maharashtrian Prime Minister. Is this not most abominable divisive politics? Why do we blame others of such a sin? Did he conduct his own survey to know the pulse of Maharashstrians? Look at the irony. His party calls itself as “nationalist” and he plays the worst possible regional card.
Let us look at the basics first. How do we elect a Prime Minister? We have a Parliamentary democracy and not Presidential democracy. A party that enjoys a majority in the House is entitled to elect its Prime Minister and such a candidate should enjoy the confidence of the MPs of his/her party. No one looks at his caste, religion or linguistic background. What is important is whether such a leader is capable enough to do justice to his post, never mind whichever state he hails from.
Pawar is trying to set a dangerous precedent by linking the post of chief executive of the country to his linguistic/regional background. If we extend this logic, why should we deny this privilege to Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal etc. Does this not open the flood gates for people of those states to make a similar demand? Will it not amount to a mockery of our Constitution? As it is, the regional parties are slowly making the national parties irrelevant which, certainly is not in the interest of the nation. Pawar is adding another dirty dimension to the country’s political ethos.
Whoever knows Pawar’s style of politics would vouch for his strange, mysterious and inscrutable political conduct. He can sup with the devil if it can serve his political purpose. If he is now playing the Marathi manoos card, one does not know whether it is just a ploy to wean away Shiv Sena from the BJP atleast after the polls. Shiv Sena, Pawar knows, is quite vulnerable and will become an easy prey for such parochial appeal. If it is not to upset the NDA alliance, he must have other political calculations to stitch up numbers.
Pawar has already declared his penchant for the Third Front and kept an option open in case he needs numbers. But how many from the Third Front will go with him is a moot question. He is going to be greatly disappointed if he counts on the Third Front to realise his ambitions. Besides the four Left parties, Third Front has TDP, TRS, JD(S) and an unknown party of Bhajan Lal and his son who may not get even a single seat. The major regional parties – BSP and AIADMK – are fence sitters till now. There are reports that Telengana Rashtra Samiti chief K Chandrasekara Rao might get out of the “Mahakutami” after the polls in case the NDA is able to pip the post since the latter has promised Telengana statehood within 100 days of coming to power. Interestingly, the Left is split in Kerala and the CPI-M’s big brother attitude has alienated the CPI and both the parties are likely to field candidates in all the 20 seats in Kerala. Revolutionary Socialist Party, one of the partners of the Front did not attend the meeting in Karnataka. So, within the Third Front, Left is in disarray and if the Left parties get 40 seats in the 15th Lok Sabha, they must thank Marx or Lenin.
Can Pawar depend on Mayawati? Certainly not. Mayawati, inspite of giving a miss to the launch function of the Front in Karnataka, has invited the Third Front members for a dinner on Sunday to find out whether they would declare her as the Front’s Prime Ministerial nominee. Probably, she wants this as a pre-condition to formally join the Third Front. All available indications are that the Front partners may oblige her as her party is likely to emerge as the single largest party after UPA and NDA. And for the Left, she will be a better bet as it will cut Amar Singh, a betrayer of the Left, to size. Further, the Left can take the credit for projecting a “Dalit beti” as the country’s first Prime Minister from the oppressed section of society. It will be a double whammy – a woman and a dalit! Most important of all, the Left can continue to exert influence at the Centre as it did for nearly four and a half years with the UPA and bark and bite whenever it likes.
This possible development is also likely to drive away the AIADMK supemo J Jayalalithaa, another aspirant for the top post, from the Front and we need not be surprised if she ties up with the NDA as UPA continues to harbour Karunanidhi despite his shrinking stock. Even her alliance with the Left in Tamil Nadu is an uneasy one and it may go bust anyday.
So, Pawar will be left with only Samajwadi Party which is the only party, so far, to have extended its support to the ambitions of NCP chief. But how many seats SP will have in its kitty to extend formidable support to Pawar? If UPA emerges stronger than what is was in 2004, a remote possibility of course, why should the SP desert the UPA and go behind Pawar? It makes no political sense.
Only two regional parties are left out in this exercise. They are the TDP and Biju Janata Dal. Both these parties are occupying anti-Congress space in their respective states and therefore, they cannot go with the UPA. They will have no alternative except to sail with the Third Front and strengthen the hands of Mayawati.
Where does this leave Pawar? In the lurch?
Thursday, March 12, 2009
POLL EVE SOPS ARE DEFERRED BRIBE
POLL EVE SOPS ARE DEFERRED BRIBE
By S R Ramanujan
Veerendra Sehwag may be the fastest cricketer today in India, especially in one-day internationals, by scoring a ton in record time. But he will turn out to be a pigmy if he were to compete with our politicians in terms of speed with which the latter are offering sops to the electorate and the speed with which they are changing their colours. If we compute the sops offered by various political parties, and in case, just in case, they come together to form a coalition, God forbid, the voter can simply sit at home and need not lift his little finger for a comfortable living.
He will have land to till, a house to live, free power, water, school/college fees of children taken care of by the state, free rice, free clothes, free medical aid in corporate hospitals, bank deposits in case he begets a female child, a colour television set with cable connection for full time enjoyment as he doesn’t have to do any work, and as a bonus cash transfer by the state in his bank account for the rainy day. After all these, you can even continue to borrow left right and centre since it will be waived off before the next elections.
How will we generate wealth for such a massive distribution of wealth is not the question to be asked, since you will then be branded anti-poor! Nor are we going to get an answer for such “silly” questions at the election time! What happens to GDP growth? Well, it is for the economic pundits to break their heads!
Telugu Desam Party chief Nara Chandrababu Naidu takes the cake in terms of volume of sops offered to the electorate though one does not know whether he or his “Mahakutami” will have a proportionate piece of the vote cake when the boxes open on May 15. However, what is common to all the rice-eating states and by all the parties is the offer of rice at Rs 2 a kg, while the market price is Rs 30 a kg. Vote bank populism zindabad!
Of course, there is no novelty in this scheme as this was originally conceived by the late C N Annadurai in 1967 itself when he promised three measures (a measure is little more than a kg) for one rupee. When he came to power he reduced it to one measure. NT Rama Rao, though an upholder of Telugu pride, had lots of Tamil influence by virtue of his long stay in Chennai and when he founded his TDP, he announced a kg of rice for Rs 2/- and it paid him handsome dividends at the hustings. Frankly, it was a boon for the BPL families and people still remember him with gratitude for this welfare measure. Soon, it became a norm for every political party to announce subsidised rice in Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, West Bengal and of course, Tamil Nadu.
However, what Chandrababu, who was once a staunch opponent of subsidies, has announced for the 2009 elections is mind boggling. The entire revenue budget of the state may not be sufficient to implement his promises. Well, he justifies the shifting stance with a philosophical note – everything on this planet has the tendency to change and change is a sign of progress. But the question that begs for an answer is why this change comes about only at the election time.
One can understand subsidised rice for the BPL families or the food-for-work programme. But is colour TV a basic need of the poor? Chandrababu thinks so. And he wants it even for the middle class! Why not? Should it be the privilege of only the rich? Forget about the middle class, even in urban slums, people have a colour television set and a mobile. Like his father-in-law, he borrowed this idea from the DMK chief minister of Tamil Nadu who promised and implemented partially the colour TV scheme. His promise of colour TV is believed to have worked for him to garner more votes. However, the fact remains that the beneficiaries had either sold the sets or kept them as an additional set at home. Why only colour TV? Should they not have a fridge or an air-conditioner to cool themselves in summer? Naidu and other politicians make it a point to have an annual break to visit Singapore or Malaysia or Europe. Why should it be the status symbol of the rich and the influential? Poorer sections should also have annual holiday at state expense! Why not free tickets to movies in multiplexes for the poor and the middle class?
It is futile to talk about economics with politicians as it does not pierce their thick hide. For example Babu’s pet scheme of “Cash Transfer Scheme”(CTS) may cost the exchequer an annual outlay of more than 40,000 crores of rupees while the state revenue is 70,000 crores. Even this CTS is not Babu’s original thought. Some of his advisers must have told him that such a scheme exists in Latin American and African countries. But, they may not have told him that what is in vogue in those countries is “Conditional Cash Transfer” (CCT) scheme. It was introduced in Mexico in 2002 and in Brazil in 2003. This is known as “Conditional Cash Transfer” because, the cash doles are in exchange for the beneficiaries fulfilling certain conditions like ensuring their children maintain a given level of school attendance, health clinics, immunization programmes, abolition of child labour, breast-feeding etc. This redistribution of wealth is, in the long run, to build up human capital among the poor through improved education, health, nutrition etc.
Has the TDP thought of any such conditionalities? After all, attitude to poverty is culture specific. Well, can we say that the socio-economic conditions are the same in India and the Latin American countries? We have successfully implemented mid-day meal scheme as a great incentive for the poor to send their wards to schools. There is free education upto degree irrespective of caste or religion. May be, inspite of this, we have school drop-outs. Atleast, the CTS should be linked to school attendance.
What is amusing is this. The Election Commission wants the calendars to be covered up wherever it shows the chief minister or Prime Minister. It wants Rajiv Gandhi’s pic to be pasted up in the EMRI ambulances, promotional paintings of welfare schemes to be erased, etc. There can’t be buntings, posters, hoardings and the like. These are not going to influence the voter either way. But what would matter are the sops that are announced just before and well after the announcement of election dates. If Mulayam gives cash in a Holi Milan during the poll campaign, or an MP minister gives away watches, they become corrupt practices; but if Babu promises cash after polls in the name of CTS, it is not a corrupt practice. Is CTS not a deferred bribe for votes, or for that matter a colour TV? What is the difference between a watch during the campaign and colour TV after the polls? Surely, the EC has to take a serious look into the sop opera of the parties. Manifestos can only talk about broad policy framework of the parties and not micro level sops which on one hand do not make any economic sense and the other influence the voter. Certainly, there will be no level playing field which the EC wants to ensure for free and fair polls.
By S R Ramanujan
Veerendra Sehwag may be the fastest cricketer today in India, especially in one-day internationals, by scoring a ton in record time. But he will turn out to be a pigmy if he were to compete with our politicians in terms of speed with which the latter are offering sops to the electorate and the speed with which they are changing their colours. If we compute the sops offered by various political parties, and in case, just in case, they come together to form a coalition, God forbid, the voter can simply sit at home and need not lift his little finger for a comfortable living.
He will have land to till, a house to live, free power, water, school/college fees of children taken care of by the state, free rice, free clothes, free medical aid in corporate hospitals, bank deposits in case he begets a female child, a colour television set with cable connection for full time enjoyment as he doesn’t have to do any work, and as a bonus cash transfer by the state in his bank account for the rainy day. After all these, you can even continue to borrow left right and centre since it will be waived off before the next elections.
How will we generate wealth for such a massive distribution of wealth is not the question to be asked, since you will then be branded anti-poor! Nor are we going to get an answer for such “silly” questions at the election time! What happens to GDP growth? Well, it is for the economic pundits to break their heads!
Telugu Desam Party chief Nara Chandrababu Naidu takes the cake in terms of volume of sops offered to the electorate though one does not know whether he or his “Mahakutami” will have a proportionate piece of the vote cake when the boxes open on May 15. However, what is common to all the rice-eating states and by all the parties is the offer of rice at Rs 2 a kg, while the market price is Rs 30 a kg. Vote bank populism zindabad!
Of course, there is no novelty in this scheme as this was originally conceived by the late C N Annadurai in 1967 itself when he promised three measures (a measure is little more than a kg) for one rupee. When he came to power he reduced it to one measure. NT Rama Rao, though an upholder of Telugu pride, had lots of Tamil influence by virtue of his long stay in Chennai and when he founded his TDP, he announced a kg of rice for Rs 2/- and it paid him handsome dividends at the hustings. Frankly, it was a boon for the BPL families and people still remember him with gratitude for this welfare measure. Soon, it became a norm for every political party to announce subsidised rice in Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, West Bengal and of course, Tamil Nadu.
However, what Chandrababu, who was once a staunch opponent of subsidies, has announced for the 2009 elections is mind boggling. The entire revenue budget of the state may not be sufficient to implement his promises. Well, he justifies the shifting stance with a philosophical note – everything on this planet has the tendency to change and change is a sign of progress. But the question that begs for an answer is why this change comes about only at the election time.
One can understand subsidised rice for the BPL families or the food-for-work programme. But is colour TV a basic need of the poor? Chandrababu thinks so. And he wants it even for the middle class! Why not? Should it be the privilege of only the rich? Forget about the middle class, even in urban slums, people have a colour television set and a mobile. Like his father-in-law, he borrowed this idea from the DMK chief minister of Tamil Nadu who promised and implemented partially the colour TV scheme. His promise of colour TV is believed to have worked for him to garner more votes. However, the fact remains that the beneficiaries had either sold the sets or kept them as an additional set at home. Why only colour TV? Should they not have a fridge or an air-conditioner to cool themselves in summer? Naidu and other politicians make it a point to have an annual break to visit Singapore or Malaysia or Europe. Why should it be the status symbol of the rich and the influential? Poorer sections should also have annual holiday at state expense! Why not free tickets to movies in multiplexes for the poor and the middle class?
It is futile to talk about economics with politicians as it does not pierce their thick hide. For example Babu’s pet scheme of “Cash Transfer Scheme”(CTS) may cost the exchequer an annual outlay of more than 40,000 crores of rupees while the state revenue is 70,000 crores. Even this CTS is not Babu’s original thought. Some of his advisers must have told him that such a scheme exists in Latin American and African countries. But, they may not have told him that what is in vogue in those countries is “Conditional Cash Transfer” (CCT) scheme. It was introduced in Mexico in 2002 and in Brazil in 2003. This is known as “Conditional Cash Transfer” because, the cash doles are in exchange for the beneficiaries fulfilling certain conditions like ensuring their children maintain a given level of school attendance, health clinics, immunization programmes, abolition of child labour, breast-feeding etc. This redistribution of wealth is, in the long run, to build up human capital among the poor through improved education, health, nutrition etc.
Has the TDP thought of any such conditionalities? After all, attitude to poverty is culture specific. Well, can we say that the socio-economic conditions are the same in India and the Latin American countries? We have successfully implemented mid-day meal scheme as a great incentive for the poor to send their wards to schools. There is free education upto degree irrespective of caste or religion. May be, inspite of this, we have school drop-outs. Atleast, the CTS should be linked to school attendance.
What is amusing is this. The Election Commission wants the calendars to be covered up wherever it shows the chief minister or Prime Minister. It wants Rajiv Gandhi’s pic to be pasted up in the EMRI ambulances, promotional paintings of welfare schemes to be erased, etc. There can’t be buntings, posters, hoardings and the like. These are not going to influence the voter either way. But what would matter are the sops that are announced just before and well after the announcement of election dates. If Mulayam gives cash in a Holi Milan during the poll campaign, or an MP minister gives away watches, they become corrupt practices; but if Babu promises cash after polls in the name of CTS, it is not a corrupt practice. Is CTS not a deferred bribe for votes, or for that matter a colour TV? What is the difference between a watch during the campaign and colour TV after the polls? Surely, the EC has to take a serious look into the sop opera of the parties. Manifestos can only talk about broad policy framework of the parties and not micro level sops which on one hand do not make any economic sense and the other influence the voter. Certainly, there will be no level playing field which the EC wants to ensure for free and fair polls.
Friday, March 6, 2009
JAI HO - FOR WHOM?
By S R Ramanujan
We the Indians have the tendency to hype everything, whether the event is positive or negative in nature. Moderation is not one of our virtues nor is it in our DNA. Let it be anything. It could be like an issue of a violent event in a pub in a small district town. We make it as though it was just a terrible event warranting international attention. We demand a fundamental right to drink! There are lakhs of small and big churches and Christian institutions in the country. A small incident in some remote church is enough to paint a picture as if the minorities are persecuted. Coming to the positive development, it could be a victory in one day match. Look at the way we are idolising cricket and cricketers. Or, when an Indian gets just one gold medal in Olympics in comparison to dozens for another country of similar economic and political stature, you must have seen how India goes ecstatic on such occasions. The winner is ushered into Rashstrapati Bhavan, PM’s Office and there are announcements galore from both governmental and non-governmental agencies. The gifts could be prime land, or flat in a posh locality, signing-of for popular brands. He or she becomes a demi-God.
So, the celebration in India over the "Slumdog Millionaire" (SDM) getting eight Oscars has to be viewed in this context as it is keeping in tune with this mindset of ours. Let me confess. My knowledge of SDM is confined to reviews and write-ups of the film in the Indian media and the media hype over it. I don’t intend to see any slum dog or street dog or rabid dog. Let the Western creative mind revel in portraying out poverty and make millions. I don’t need to see it in the celluloid.
As some critics point out SDM was a film produced and directed by Westerner for Western audience just to showcase the underbelly of India. Western audience probably suffers from a complex and when it sees something negative about the developing countries, it wants to pat itself on its back. Though there was no global recession at the time of producing SDM, the timing of the release when the developed world was under throes of unprecedented meltdown in contrast to the not-so-worrisome situation in India, made the film click. There was vicarious pleasure to see the poverty in India when the nation was trying to emerge as an Asian tiger challenging the Chinese dragon.
Besides, what is so Indian about the film for the Indian media and politicians to go ga ga over it. Yes, A R Rehman and Resul Pookutty got the Oscar awards. They have not got the award for a non-Hollywood film category. Let us ask ourselves. Had the film not been produced by a Hollywood film maker and directed by a British, would it have stood a chance to come to the nomination stage atleast? "Salaam Bombay" was also a great film. Did it get the same recognition? What about Lagaan? It glorified Indian team spirit and did not show the "phirangies" in great colours. So, naturally, it was out of Oscar. Why? There was not a single film produced by India or Indians to reach the Oscar academy. "Gandhi" was again not an Indian film which won eight Oscar awards in 1982 though all the locales for the shoot were from India like SDM. Does this mean that only Hollywood personalities and "Whites" alone can produce Oscar award winning films?
It was only from the year 1956 films not produced in Hollywood were considered for the awards under the "foreign films" category. Since then, 34 Indian films were sent for Oscar nominations. And, so far, that is in 52 years, three films only could reach the nomination stage - They were "Mother India" (1957), "Salaam Bombay" (1988) and "Lagaan" (2001). "Swathi Muthyam" (Telugu - 1986), was the only Telugu movie sent to Oscar and among the Indian languages, next to Hindi, Tamil occupies the second place in terms of numbers with eight films including "Anjali" "Indian", "Jeans" and "He Ram". 21 Hindi films were sent and out of which only 3 could find place in the list of final nominations.
"Smile Pinki", focussing on cleft lip children, could get the award for Best documentary (short) for this year because it was directed by a Hollywood personality Megan Mylan. But "Thare Zameen Par", though it might come under different category, focussing on spastics did not reach even the nomination stage. Does this mean that Indians do not have the talent nor they failed to produce an Oscar-grade film? Far from it. But, they are not from the Western hemisphere of this planet. That’s why veteran actor Kamal Hasan said recently that instead of hankering after Oscar, we should create our own Oscar so that foreign producers and directors vie for recognition from such an institution.
Now, let us take Rehman himself? Is his music for "Jai Ho" the best that he has created? Music buffs in India concede that he had come out with more wonderful music, much much better than "Jai Ho". Was his music for "Roja" any less great? Probably, poor Rehman did not create it for the films produced by Hollywood film makers.
We need not bother about media hype. By now we got used to its silly build up for non-events. Shoulder surgery for Shahru Khan takes precedence over the interim budget, mind you. Pink chaddy campaign is its favourite. What takes the cake is the competitive credit taking venture of our politicians in this election year. First, it was the ailing Tamil Nadu chief minister who said it was a victory for Tamils. He could see Rehman only as a Tamil and not an Indian. It started with linguistic parochialism and extended to political opportunism. As a side show, extreme right wing forces starting tracing the Hindu background of Rehman who before his conversion into Islam was known as Dilip Kumar Mudaliar and his parentage of Shekhar and Kasturi. He was reported to be a non-believer after his father’s death and the miraculous recovery of his sister from deathbed, thanks to Peer Baba, made him to embrace Islam. Well, does this reduce his importance or diminish the greatness of his music?
Look at the Congress party for taking credit for SDM! According to its spokesperson, the success of SDM is due to UPA’s governance and the conducive atmosphere created by it provided the "solid bedrock for an Achieving India". Does this mean that his party government which has been ruling Maharashtra except for a short break did not do anything to remove either slums in Mumbai or poverty in general provided the "solid bedrock" for Director Danny Boyle to create an award winning film. There must be atleast a modicum of shame for these politicians.
What I shudder to think is this. For just one song and sound mixing, if we are making this kind of noise, how would our media and politicians behave if an Indian film or director wins an Oscar?
We the Indians have the tendency to hype everything, whether the event is positive or negative in nature. Moderation is not one of our virtues nor is it in our DNA. Let it be anything. It could be like an issue of a violent event in a pub in a small district town. We make it as though it was just a terrible event warranting international attention. We demand a fundamental right to drink! There are lakhs of small and big churches and Christian institutions in the country. A small incident in some remote church is enough to paint a picture as if the minorities are persecuted. Coming to the positive development, it could be a victory in one day match. Look at the way we are idolising cricket and cricketers. Or, when an Indian gets just one gold medal in Olympics in comparison to dozens for another country of similar economic and political stature, you must have seen how India goes ecstatic on such occasions. The winner is ushered into Rashstrapati Bhavan, PM’s Office and there are announcements galore from both governmental and non-governmental agencies. The gifts could be prime land, or flat in a posh locality, signing-of for popular brands. He or she becomes a demi-God.
So, the celebration in India over the "Slumdog Millionaire" (SDM) getting eight Oscars has to be viewed in this context as it is keeping in tune with this mindset of ours. Let me confess. My knowledge of SDM is confined to reviews and write-ups of the film in the Indian media and the media hype over it. I don’t intend to see any slum dog or street dog or rabid dog. Let the Western creative mind revel in portraying out poverty and make millions. I don’t need to see it in the celluloid.
As some critics point out SDM was a film produced and directed by Westerner for Western audience just to showcase the underbelly of India. Western audience probably suffers from a complex and when it sees something negative about the developing countries, it wants to pat itself on its back. Though there was no global recession at the time of producing SDM, the timing of the release when the developed world was under throes of unprecedented meltdown in contrast to the not-so-worrisome situation in India, made the film click. There was vicarious pleasure to see the poverty in India when the nation was trying to emerge as an Asian tiger challenging the Chinese dragon.
Besides, what is so Indian about the film for the Indian media and politicians to go ga ga over it. Yes, A R Rehman and Resul Pookutty got the Oscar awards. They have not got the award for a non-Hollywood film category. Let us ask ourselves. Had the film not been produced by a Hollywood film maker and directed by a British, would it have stood a chance to come to the nomination stage atleast? "Salaam Bombay" was also a great film. Did it get the same recognition? What about Lagaan? It glorified Indian team spirit and did not show the "phirangies" in great colours. So, naturally, it was out of Oscar. Why? There was not a single film produced by India or Indians to reach the Oscar academy. "Gandhi" was again not an Indian film which won eight Oscar awards in 1982 though all the locales for the shoot were from India like SDM. Does this mean that only Hollywood personalities and "Whites" alone can produce Oscar award winning films?
It was only from the year 1956 films not produced in Hollywood were considered for the awards under the "foreign films" category. Since then, 34 Indian films were sent for Oscar nominations. And, so far, that is in 52 years, three films only could reach the nomination stage - They were "Mother India" (1957), "Salaam Bombay" (1988) and "Lagaan" (2001). "Swathi Muthyam" (Telugu - 1986), was the only Telugu movie sent to Oscar and among the Indian languages, next to Hindi, Tamil occupies the second place in terms of numbers with eight films including "Anjali" "Indian", "Jeans" and "He Ram". 21 Hindi films were sent and out of which only 3 could find place in the list of final nominations.
"Smile Pinki", focussing on cleft lip children, could get the award for Best documentary (short) for this year because it was directed by a Hollywood personality Megan Mylan. But "Thare Zameen Par", though it might come under different category, focussing on spastics did not reach even the nomination stage. Does this mean that Indians do not have the talent nor they failed to produce an Oscar-grade film? Far from it. But, they are not from the Western hemisphere of this planet. That’s why veteran actor Kamal Hasan said recently that instead of hankering after Oscar, we should create our own Oscar so that foreign producers and directors vie for recognition from such an institution.
Now, let us take Rehman himself? Is his music for "Jai Ho" the best that he has created? Music buffs in India concede that he had come out with more wonderful music, much much better than "Jai Ho". Was his music for "Roja" any less great? Probably, poor Rehman did not create it for the films produced by Hollywood film makers.
We need not bother about media hype. By now we got used to its silly build up for non-events. Shoulder surgery for Shahru Khan takes precedence over the interim budget, mind you. Pink chaddy campaign is its favourite. What takes the cake is the competitive credit taking venture of our politicians in this election year. First, it was the ailing Tamil Nadu chief minister who said it was a victory for Tamils. He could see Rehman only as a Tamil and not an Indian. It started with linguistic parochialism and extended to political opportunism. As a side show, extreme right wing forces starting tracing the Hindu background of Rehman who before his conversion into Islam was known as Dilip Kumar Mudaliar and his parentage of Shekhar and Kasturi. He was reported to be a non-believer after his father’s death and the miraculous recovery of his sister from deathbed, thanks to Peer Baba, made him to embrace Islam. Well, does this reduce his importance or diminish the greatness of his music?
Look at the Congress party for taking credit for SDM! According to its spokesperson, the success of SDM is due to UPA’s governance and the conducive atmosphere created by it provided the "solid bedrock for an Achieving India". Does this mean that his party government which has been ruling Maharashtra except for a short break did not do anything to remove either slums in Mumbai or poverty in general provided the "solid bedrock" for Director Danny Boyle to create an award winning film. There must be atleast a modicum of shame for these politicians.
What I shudder to think is this. For just one song and sound mixing, if we are making this kind of noise, how would our media and politicians behave if an Indian film or director wins an Oscar?
Thursday, March 5, 2009
SEASON OF POSTURING & POSITIONING
By S R Ramanujan
__________________________________________________________________________
Even as the world’s largest democracy is gearing up for a massive exercise to elect its 15th Lok Sabha by an electorate of more than 70 crore voters, what is happening in its neighbourhood, which were once part of the undivided India, should cause dismay and extreme worry. Chaos in our border nations is not to our advantage. Both Pakistan and Banagladesh are facing an unfortunate prospect of yet another military take over. It is quite clear that civil administration in Pakistan has lost control and it is unable to rein in those elements whom the country nurtured for long with ulterior motive. The time has come to pay back for its sins. Mutiny by Bangladesh Rifles is yet another grim reminder that democracy is a far cry for the beleaguered nation. These developments only confirm the widely held belief that Islam and democracy do not go together. Both our neighbours who opted for theocracy and tried their hand in democracy are failing. We could not help reminding ourselves of this reality as we are bracing up for elections with all its pitfalls. Undeniably, money power and muscle power, in their crude display, mar the spirit of this democratic exercise. But the soul of democracy is intact and we must feel proud of it.
Having said that, we can’t escape from taking a hard look at the realities of the poll exercise. What comes quite easily to politicians is "posturing" and it began in Gujarat on the Nano project of the Tatas. From the day Tatas decided to shift its unit to Gujarat after facing a state of turmoil in West Bengal, especially when so many Congress states, including Andhra Pradesh, rolled out the red carpet for the project, the grand old party of the nation could not digest the success of Modi. It wanted to score browny points. The usual suspect, Narendra Modi, and by extension the BJP, was branded as pro-rich, pro-corporate since, according to the Congress, cars are not a priority for the "aam admi". Does it mean that we have to close down all the major industries and go for cottage industries only? Well, this was obliquely suggested when Congress spokesperson said that in the Gandhiji’s state where Gandhiji wanted village economy to flourish, we have Nanos. The Congress wanted to position itself as "pro-poor" while charging its main contender for power as "pro-rich". Somehow, this did not click.
Now, the party wants to appropriate "Jai Ho" song for its campaign. Already there are posters of A R Rahman alongside Congress leaders. Does Rahman’s life style square up with "aam admi"? What a shame! What is the party’s contribution to the success of the Hollywood film or to the song which got the award? Yes, there is a major contribution. It provided the slum for Boyle to shoot the filth to his heart’s content so that Western audience could sit and enjoy the poverty of India.
Not to be outdone, the BJP also started the posturing game. The party’s Prime Ministerial candidate, Lal Krishna Advani wanted to appropriate Babasaheb Ambedkar for the party while participating in a dalit rally. Of course, he stated what was obvious and it was no secret. The Congress party did not give due importance to Ambedkar while he was alive and it saw to it that he and his party were defeated at the 1952 elections. According to political pundits, Advani wanted to achieve two things. First, it was to alienate dalits from the Congress by painting Congress as anti-Ambedkar and second, to build bridges with Mayawati by sharing common concern. Congress instantly reacted to this and quoted extensively from Arun Shourie’s "Worshipping false gods". There is no denying the fact that Ambedkar was the worst critic of Gandhiji and there was no love lost between them. Realising that any in-depth debate on the subject would only embarrass the Congress, there was silence from the second day. And the BJP, too, would not have been comfortable what with Shourie going hammer and tongs against Ambedkar calling him a British stooge in his book first published in 1997. So, there was an undeclared truce on the issue.
The poll battle is, in a way, gang war. In a gang war you don’t see the background of the person who joins your gang. What is important is whether the gangster has the muscle and the grit to use the muscle. Similarly, while the major parties are looking for allies, they are not bothered about their credentials. We should say that the concept of "political untouchability" , introduced by the Left, has been buried deep. Otherwise, how do you explain Mulayam Singh Yadav and Kalyan Singh coming together? How can YS Rajasekara Reddy make advances to Narendra, an RSS loyalist, to contest from Medak, assuming that media reports are correct? What is common between Prakash Karat and Jayalalithaa, the latter being a known sympathiser of Hindu cause and an acolyte of Narendra Modi? What makes Sharad Pawar to wink at Shiv Sena? What makes Advani to embrace a hard-boiled turncoat like Ajit Singh? So, the criteria is "winnability" and not ideology. If UPA has seven allies, the NDA must have equal number. So, that is the race now between the two major coalitions, but the time is running out.
Where does this leave the so-called Third Front, championed by the "sleeping Buddha" and the former Prime Minister Deve Gowda. According to him, the Front has eight partners - JD(S), TDP, TRS, AIADMK, and four Left parties. Already, Jayalalithaa is playing truant because her eyes are on the post-poll scenario. She may not mind going with either UPA or NDA depending on who gets the highest tally. Left parties also will have similar option except for the fact that they may not go with the NDA, whereas TDP may not be averse to sail with the NDA, but certainly not with the UPA. The only party that will remain with the Third Front is JD(S) with its tally of 3 or 4 MPs. Gowda’s hope is on Mayawati who has made it known that she will go alone. But then, how can he have two PM candidates in his Front?
It is not that the UPA is very comfortable with its allies. Sharad Pawar wants national alliance, and not state-wise seat adjustments. SP-Congress relations are an uneasy one in UP. Lalu and Paswan are shifting their stands quite often. Mamta is the most unpredictable ally for the Congress in W Bengal. Karunanidhi is not sure of himself in T Nadu and he has already started a war with the state Chief Electoral Officer, fearing that the latter’s independent functioning is not to his electoral advantage.
So far as NDA is concerned, it is also not on a firm footing either. Nitish Kumar has already started echoing the sentiments of Sharad Pawar. He says JD(U) will contest on its own outside Bihar if there is no national alliance. If Pawar gets an upper hand, Shiv Sena might play the Marathi manus card. Chautala and Ajit Singh are fly-by-night operators in politics.
It may take a couple of weeks for the major political formations to consolidate their positions. Until then, jockeying for space and posturing will go on.
__________________________________________________________________________
Even as the world’s largest democracy is gearing up for a massive exercise to elect its 15th Lok Sabha by an electorate of more than 70 crore voters, what is happening in its neighbourhood, which were once part of the undivided India, should cause dismay and extreme worry. Chaos in our border nations is not to our advantage. Both Pakistan and Banagladesh are facing an unfortunate prospect of yet another military take over. It is quite clear that civil administration in Pakistan has lost control and it is unable to rein in those elements whom the country nurtured for long with ulterior motive. The time has come to pay back for its sins. Mutiny by Bangladesh Rifles is yet another grim reminder that democracy is a far cry for the beleaguered nation. These developments only confirm the widely held belief that Islam and democracy do not go together. Both our neighbours who opted for theocracy and tried their hand in democracy are failing. We could not help reminding ourselves of this reality as we are bracing up for elections with all its pitfalls. Undeniably, money power and muscle power, in their crude display, mar the spirit of this democratic exercise. But the soul of democracy is intact and we must feel proud of it.
Having said that, we can’t escape from taking a hard look at the realities of the poll exercise. What comes quite easily to politicians is "posturing" and it began in Gujarat on the Nano project of the Tatas. From the day Tatas decided to shift its unit to Gujarat after facing a state of turmoil in West Bengal, especially when so many Congress states, including Andhra Pradesh, rolled out the red carpet for the project, the grand old party of the nation could not digest the success of Modi. It wanted to score browny points. The usual suspect, Narendra Modi, and by extension the BJP, was branded as pro-rich, pro-corporate since, according to the Congress, cars are not a priority for the "aam admi". Does it mean that we have to close down all the major industries and go for cottage industries only? Well, this was obliquely suggested when Congress spokesperson said that in the Gandhiji’s state where Gandhiji wanted village economy to flourish, we have Nanos. The Congress wanted to position itself as "pro-poor" while charging its main contender for power as "pro-rich". Somehow, this did not click.
Now, the party wants to appropriate "Jai Ho" song for its campaign. Already there are posters of A R Rahman alongside Congress leaders. Does Rahman’s life style square up with "aam admi"? What a shame! What is the party’s contribution to the success of the Hollywood film or to the song which got the award? Yes, there is a major contribution. It provided the slum for Boyle to shoot the filth to his heart’s content so that Western audience could sit and enjoy the poverty of India.
Not to be outdone, the BJP also started the posturing game. The party’s Prime Ministerial candidate, Lal Krishna Advani wanted to appropriate Babasaheb Ambedkar for the party while participating in a dalit rally. Of course, he stated what was obvious and it was no secret. The Congress party did not give due importance to Ambedkar while he was alive and it saw to it that he and his party were defeated at the 1952 elections. According to political pundits, Advani wanted to achieve two things. First, it was to alienate dalits from the Congress by painting Congress as anti-Ambedkar and second, to build bridges with Mayawati by sharing common concern. Congress instantly reacted to this and quoted extensively from Arun Shourie’s "Worshipping false gods". There is no denying the fact that Ambedkar was the worst critic of Gandhiji and there was no love lost between them. Realising that any in-depth debate on the subject would only embarrass the Congress, there was silence from the second day. And the BJP, too, would not have been comfortable what with Shourie going hammer and tongs against Ambedkar calling him a British stooge in his book first published in 1997. So, there was an undeclared truce on the issue.
The poll battle is, in a way, gang war. In a gang war you don’t see the background of the person who joins your gang. What is important is whether the gangster has the muscle and the grit to use the muscle. Similarly, while the major parties are looking for allies, they are not bothered about their credentials. We should say that the concept of "political untouchability" , introduced by the Left, has been buried deep. Otherwise, how do you explain Mulayam Singh Yadav and Kalyan Singh coming together? How can YS Rajasekara Reddy make advances to Narendra, an RSS loyalist, to contest from Medak, assuming that media reports are correct? What is common between Prakash Karat and Jayalalithaa, the latter being a known sympathiser of Hindu cause and an acolyte of Narendra Modi? What makes Sharad Pawar to wink at Shiv Sena? What makes Advani to embrace a hard-boiled turncoat like Ajit Singh? So, the criteria is "winnability" and not ideology. If UPA has seven allies, the NDA must have equal number. So, that is the race now between the two major coalitions, but the time is running out.
Where does this leave the so-called Third Front, championed by the "sleeping Buddha" and the former Prime Minister Deve Gowda. According to him, the Front has eight partners - JD(S), TDP, TRS, AIADMK, and four Left parties. Already, Jayalalithaa is playing truant because her eyes are on the post-poll scenario. She may not mind going with either UPA or NDA depending on who gets the highest tally. Left parties also will have similar option except for the fact that they may not go with the NDA, whereas TDP may not be averse to sail with the NDA, but certainly not with the UPA. The only party that will remain with the Third Front is JD(S) with its tally of 3 or 4 MPs. Gowda’s hope is on Mayawati who has made it known that she will go alone. But then, how can he have two PM candidates in his Front?
It is not that the UPA is very comfortable with its allies. Sharad Pawar wants national alliance, and not state-wise seat adjustments. SP-Congress relations are an uneasy one in UP. Lalu and Paswan are shifting their stands quite often. Mamta is the most unpredictable ally for the Congress in W Bengal. Karunanidhi is not sure of himself in T Nadu and he has already started a war with the state Chief Electoral Officer, fearing that the latter’s independent functioning is not to his electoral advantage.
So far as NDA is concerned, it is also not on a firm footing either. Nitish Kumar has already started echoing the sentiments of Sharad Pawar. He says JD(U) will contest on its own outside Bihar if there is no national alliance. If Pawar gets an upper hand, Shiv Sena might play the Marathi manus card. Chautala and Ajit Singh are fly-by-night operators in politics.
It may take a couple of weeks for the major political formations to consolidate their positions. Until then, jockeying for space and posturing will go on.
ROLE OF AN OMBUDSMAN IN A NEWSPAPER
By S R Ramanujan
The Hindu being the only newspaper in the country to have an Ombudsman there are perhaps no traditions or precedents to precisely define the role of an Ombudsman. If one goes through the weekly columns of K Narayanan, Readers Editor of The Hindu, also known as Ombudsman in popular jargon, his office seems to be a dignified "Post Office" for after all he merely conveys how the readers react to journalistic lapses, if you leave aside complaints about grammar, typos and factual inaccuracies which, of course, are promptly corrected by the daily. Rarely have we come across a strongly worded disapproval from the Readers Editor
The recent instance where the Readers Editor failed to come out with a clear indictment of the biased reporting of the CEC episode by the daily, with its Editor-in-chief leading the fight from the front, was his column "Readers’ right to a complete picture" (March 2, 2009). No doubt, he reproduced salient points of the letters he received from the readers which, when summed up, charge the daily of partisan coverage and mixing of news and views, particularly the expose by the daily’s Editor-in-chief carried as banner story.
Yet another complaint was that the daily did not give enough space for the views that were not in agreement with the views of the daily. Of course, Narayanan felt that "fairness demanded that those voices should also be heard". What was the editorial response? "The denial of equal space to the opposite view has nothing to do with fairness; it is a matter of value judgement". This abrasive comment silenced the Readers Editor. This is perhaps one of the reasons the old-fashioned editor would not be seen except in the print line. But these are the days of media activism, you see. The crux of the issue as raised by the daily’s readers was that the "value judgement" of the newspaper is quite often flawed. And that is the point to be addressed by the Ombudsman. Well, he did not. This is not the solitary instance. Whenever serious comment of bias was hurled at the paper, the editorial response was always dismissive and took shelter under "news judgement".
Not surprisingly, many of the readers complain that "critical" letters are not carried in the paper. It is possible because that most of the names of correspondents and the contents of their letters, as we could see in Narayanan’s Monday columns, never find place on the Letters to the Editor. This made those correspondents forward such letters to the Readers Editor. A correspondent wrote that N Ram’s response to Gopalaswamy was dismissive, if not imperious and this was promptly spiked.
Be that as it may, what is an expose? As we all know it doesn’t fall from the heaven. It has to be an inspired leak from an interested party to achieve a particular result. In the case of CEC controversy, there can be only three agencies from where the contents of the Gopalaswamy’s letter could have been leaked. 1. Election Commission itself which is most improbable as no political purpose will be served by such a leak; 2. Rashtrapati Bhavan - since the letter was addressed to the President of India. The profile of the present incumbent being what it is, even this source can be ruled out; 3. Central Cabinet - the ultimate destination of the letter. The Union government is the only party that will be interested in kicking off a row over the contents of the CEC letter and to anoint Navin Chawla as the new CEC after painting Gopalaswamy black for tarnishing the image of a Constitutional office.
It is perfectly within the realm of journalistic ethics to pick up such "leaks" as there was a great public interest in the story. But while presenting the story you cannot be seen to be completely partisan and editorialise the news story. When a question was raised in the news report about the timing of the CEC letter, no questions were raised as to why the Union cabinet did not take a decision on the letter though it was before the government by the beginning of January. Obviously, the government wanted to drag the issue till the announcement of election dates so that no court can entertain a petition against Chawla’s appointment once the poll process has begun.
Further, the quotes from the letter were very selective only to harp on the fact that the CEC was biased against Chawla and the main thrust was on the Article 324(5) of the Constitution and the suo motu powers of the CEC to recommend the removal of EC. But, before recommending Chawla’s removal CEC might have built up a case against him in his letter by citing instances of Chawla’s partisan approach. Why was that letter not published, especially when it has become fashionable these days for dailies or channels to claim access to vital and sometimes not-so-vital documents?
There are two possibilities here. One is whether the editor’s source has given him a copy of the CEC letter and if so, why he failed to publish the letter in such a manner without giving scope to betray the source. The second possibility is that he was not given a copy of the letter, but only selective excerpts that would suit the establishment; in which case he should have refused to oblige his source.
Fortunately, Readers Editor acquired courage to say that "the reader also had a right to know what were the objections to Mr Chawla’s continuance in office, as raised by the BJP". Referring to page l expose, he also commented "That there were elements of editorialising, which the Editor-in-chief strongly disapproves, in the page 1 report is undeniable". There cannot be more milder rebuke.
The real clincher to bare the partisan mindset and lack of proportion of the daily on the CEC controversy was its full-length editorial (March 3) on the President’s rejection of CEC’s recommendation for the removal of Chawla. Well, it is the prerogative of the Editor to decide on the length of his editorials, as for example, the editor must have thought in his wisdom that the terrorist attack on Sri Lankan team was not that significant to warrant similar verbiage. May be, misplaced priority is inescapable when you run a crusade. But one cannot help wondering whether the Editor-in-chief would have applied the same tone and tenor in his coverage if the petition against Chawla was made by the Marxists instead of the BJP.
After long digression, let me come to the role of Readers Editor. Is he just a pressure valve or punching bag for the readers? If he has no ability or the clout to change the practices of the news room or to pull up the erring staff so as to ensure journalistic ethics, what is the purpose in creating such an institution? It could at best be a captive version of the Press Council. If it is only to get a feel of the readers pulse, the editor has enough fora.
No doubt, this is a catch-22 situation. If the Readers Editor has penal powers to maintain journalistic standards, he will become another power centre besides the editor which will be most unhealthy. If he does not have any powers except to make some vegetarian remarks which are again dismissed by the editor, there is no point in having a Readers Editor.
The scenario in American newspapers like The Washington Post or The New York Times is no different. Deborah Howell, who preceded the present Ombudsman of The Washington Post says "All she can do is write her column which they can’t touch. But they don’t have to listen to it either".
The New York Times calls its Ombudsman as "Public Editor". Daniel Okrent, NYT’s Public Editor in 2004 commented "Editorial opinion is protected opinion - certainly protected from an Ombudsman. I disagree with many Times editorials, but strongly believe that disagreement is not grounds for intervention or engagement in my professional capacity". An enraged blogger called him "a dunce", "a numbskull", and "a ninny". But our readers are more refined and sophisticated and they may not use swear words. But that does not mean Readers Editor should continue to be toothless.
There is only one possibility to ensure his independence. The Ombudsman should operate outside the management structure of the newspaper and his office should be financed by the readers. The newspaper can collect a very nominal cess (say 50 paise per month may not be unaffordable) from the subscribers along with the monthly subscription fee and make it available for running the office of Ombudsman. He should also be elected by readers out of a panel of 3 or 4 eminent journalists nominated by the newspaper. Will this make the Ombudsman the real "Readers Editor" and help him function with independence and grit?
The Hindu being the only newspaper in the country to have an Ombudsman there are perhaps no traditions or precedents to precisely define the role of an Ombudsman. If one goes through the weekly columns of K Narayanan, Readers Editor of The Hindu, also known as Ombudsman in popular jargon, his office seems to be a dignified "Post Office" for after all he merely conveys how the readers react to journalistic lapses, if you leave aside complaints about grammar, typos and factual inaccuracies which, of course, are promptly corrected by the daily. Rarely have we come across a strongly worded disapproval from the Readers Editor
The recent instance where the Readers Editor failed to come out with a clear indictment of the biased reporting of the CEC episode by the daily, with its Editor-in-chief leading the fight from the front, was his column "Readers’ right to a complete picture" (March 2, 2009). No doubt, he reproduced salient points of the letters he received from the readers which, when summed up, charge the daily of partisan coverage and mixing of news and views, particularly the expose by the daily’s Editor-in-chief carried as banner story.
Yet another complaint was that the daily did not give enough space for the views that were not in agreement with the views of the daily. Of course, Narayanan felt that "fairness demanded that those voices should also be heard". What was the editorial response? "The denial of equal space to the opposite view has nothing to do with fairness; it is a matter of value judgement". This abrasive comment silenced the Readers Editor. This is perhaps one of the reasons the old-fashioned editor would not be seen except in the print line. But these are the days of media activism, you see. The crux of the issue as raised by the daily’s readers was that the "value judgement" of the newspaper is quite often flawed. And that is the point to be addressed by the Ombudsman. Well, he did not. This is not the solitary instance. Whenever serious comment of bias was hurled at the paper, the editorial response was always dismissive and took shelter under "news judgement".
Not surprisingly, many of the readers complain that "critical" letters are not carried in the paper. It is possible because that most of the names of correspondents and the contents of their letters, as we could see in Narayanan’s Monday columns, never find place on the Letters to the Editor. This made those correspondents forward such letters to the Readers Editor. A correspondent wrote that N Ram’s response to Gopalaswamy was dismissive, if not imperious and this was promptly spiked.
Be that as it may, what is an expose? As we all know it doesn’t fall from the heaven. It has to be an inspired leak from an interested party to achieve a particular result. In the case of CEC controversy, there can be only three agencies from where the contents of the Gopalaswamy’s letter could have been leaked. 1. Election Commission itself which is most improbable as no political purpose will be served by such a leak; 2. Rashtrapati Bhavan - since the letter was addressed to the President of India. The profile of the present incumbent being what it is, even this source can be ruled out; 3. Central Cabinet - the ultimate destination of the letter. The Union government is the only party that will be interested in kicking off a row over the contents of the CEC letter and to anoint Navin Chawla as the new CEC after painting Gopalaswamy black for tarnishing the image of a Constitutional office.
It is perfectly within the realm of journalistic ethics to pick up such "leaks" as there was a great public interest in the story. But while presenting the story you cannot be seen to be completely partisan and editorialise the news story. When a question was raised in the news report about the timing of the CEC letter, no questions were raised as to why the Union cabinet did not take a decision on the letter though it was before the government by the beginning of January. Obviously, the government wanted to drag the issue till the announcement of election dates so that no court can entertain a petition against Chawla’s appointment once the poll process has begun.
Further, the quotes from the letter were very selective only to harp on the fact that the CEC was biased against Chawla and the main thrust was on the Article 324(5) of the Constitution and the suo motu powers of the CEC to recommend the removal of EC. But, before recommending Chawla’s removal CEC might have built up a case against him in his letter by citing instances of Chawla’s partisan approach. Why was that letter not published, especially when it has become fashionable these days for dailies or channels to claim access to vital and sometimes not-so-vital documents?
There are two possibilities here. One is whether the editor’s source has given him a copy of the CEC letter and if so, why he failed to publish the letter in such a manner without giving scope to betray the source. The second possibility is that he was not given a copy of the letter, but only selective excerpts that would suit the establishment; in which case he should have refused to oblige his source.
Fortunately, Readers Editor acquired courage to say that "the reader also had a right to know what were the objections to Mr Chawla’s continuance in office, as raised by the BJP". Referring to page l expose, he also commented "That there were elements of editorialising, which the Editor-in-chief strongly disapproves, in the page 1 report is undeniable". There cannot be more milder rebuke.
The real clincher to bare the partisan mindset and lack of proportion of the daily on the CEC controversy was its full-length editorial (March 3) on the President’s rejection of CEC’s recommendation for the removal of Chawla. Well, it is the prerogative of the Editor to decide on the length of his editorials, as for example, the editor must have thought in his wisdom that the terrorist attack on Sri Lankan team was not that significant to warrant similar verbiage. May be, misplaced priority is inescapable when you run a crusade. But one cannot help wondering whether the Editor-in-chief would have applied the same tone and tenor in his coverage if the petition against Chawla was made by the Marxists instead of the BJP.
After long digression, let me come to the role of Readers Editor. Is he just a pressure valve or punching bag for the readers? If he has no ability or the clout to change the practices of the news room or to pull up the erring staff so as to ensure journalistic ethics, what is the purpose in creating such an institution? It could at best be a captive version of the Press Council. If it is only to get a feel of the readers pulse, the editor has enough fora.
No doubt, this is a catch-22 situation. If the Readers Editor has penal powers to maintain journalistic standards, he will become another power centre besides the editor which will be most unhealthy. If he does not have any powers except to make some vegetarian remarks which are again dismissed by the editor, there is no point in having a Readers Editor.
The scenario in American newspapers like The Washington Post or The New York Times is no different. Deborah Howell, who preceded the present Ombudsman of The Washington Post says "All she can do is write her column which they can’t touch. But they don’t have to listen to it either".
The New York Times calls its Ombudsman as "Public Editor". Daniel Okrent, NYT’s Public Editor in 2004 commented "Editorial opinion is protected opinion - certainly protected from an Ombudsman. I disagree with many Times editorials, but strongly believe that disagreement is not grounds for intervention or engagement in my professional capacity". An enraged blogger called him "a dunce", "a numbskull", and "a ninny". But our readers are more refined and sophisticated and they may not use swear words. But that does not mean Readers Editor should continue to be toothless.
There is only one possibility to ensure his independence. The Ombudsman should operate outside the management structure of the newspaper and his office should be financed by the readers. The newspaper can collect a very nominal cess (say 50 paise per month may not be unaffordable) from the subscribers along with the monthly subscription fee and make it available for running the office of Ombudsman. He should also be elected by readers out of a panel of 3 or 4 eminent journalists nominated by the newspaper. Will this make the Ombudsman the real "Readers Editor" and help him function with independence and grit?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)